Hyppää sisältöön
    • Suomeksi
    • In English
  • Suomeksi
  • In English
  • Kirjaudu
Näytä aineisto 
  •   Etusivu
  • 3. UTUCris-artikkelit
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet
  • Näytä aineisto
  •   Etusivu
  • 3. UTUCris-artikkelit
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet
  • Näytä aineisto
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Choice of dialysis modality among patients initiating dialysis: results of the Peridialysis study

Bumblyte Inge; Randers Else; Kampmann Jan Dominik; Ots-Rosenberg Mai; Heimburger Olof; Zilinskiene Alanta; Rogland Björn; Vernere Baiba; Heiro Maija; Løkkegaard Niels; Petersons Aivars; Heaf James; Lindholm Bengt; Povlsen Johan V.; Kjellevold Stig; Clyne Naomi; Lagreid Inger; Sørensen Anette Bagger

Choice of dialysis modality among patients initiating dialysis: results of the Peridialysis study

Bumblyte Inge
Randers Else
Kampmann Jan Dominik
Ots-Rosenberg Mai
Heimburger Olof
Zilinskiene Alanta
Rogland Björn
Vernere Baiba
Heiro Maija
Løkkegaard Niels
Petersons Aivars
Heaf James
Lindholm Bengt
Povlsen Johan V.
Kjellevold Stig
Clyne Naomi
Lagreid Inger
Sørensen Anette Bagger
Katso/Avaa
Publisher's PDF (699.7Kb)
Lataukset: 

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
doi:10.1093/ckj/sfaa260
Näytä kaikki kuvailutiedot
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on:
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2021100750253
Tiivistelmä


Background.

In patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), home dialysis offers socio-economic and health benefits compared with in-centre dialysis but is generally underutilized. We hypothesized that the pre-dialysis course and institutional factors affect the choice of dialysis modality after dialysis initiation (DI).

Methods.

The Peridialysis study is a multinational, multicentre prospective observational study assessing the causes and timing of DI and consequences of suboptimal DI. Clinical and biochemical data, details of the pre-dialytic course, reasons for DI and causes of the choice of dialysis modality were registered.

Results.

Among 1587 included patients, 516 (32.5%) were judged unsuitable for home dialysis due to contraindications [384 ( 24.2%)] or no assessment [106 (6.7%); mainly due to late referral and/or suboptimal DI] or death [26 (1.6%)]. Older age, comorbidity, late referral, suboptimal DI, acute illness and rapid loss of renal function associated with unsuitability. Of the remaining 1071 patients, 700 (65.4%) chose peritoneal dialysis (61.7%) or home haemodialysis (HD; 3.6%), while 371 (34.6%) chose in-centre HD. Somatic differences between patients choosing home dialysis and in-centre dialysis were minor; factors linked to the choice of in-centre dialysis were late referral, suboptimal DI, acute illness and absence of a 'home dialysis first' institutional policy.

Conclusions.

Given a personal choice with shared decision making, 65.4% of ESKD patients choose home dialysis. Our data indicate that the incidence of home dialysis potentially could be further increased to reduce the incidence of late referral and unplanned DI and, in acutely ill patients, by implementing an educational programme after improvement of their clinical condition.

Kokoelmat
  • Rinnakkaistallenteet [19207]

Turun yliopiston kirjasto | Turun yliopisto
julkaisut@utu.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste
 

 

Tämä kokoelma

JulkaisuajatTekijätNimekkeetAsiasanatTiedekuntaLaitosOppiaineYhteisöt ja kokoelmat

Omat tiedot

Kirjaudu sisäänRekisteröidy

Turun yliopiston kirjasto | Turun yliopisto
julkaisut@utu.fi | Tietosuoja | Saavutettavuusseloste